FACTUAL coverage comparison (Verizon's LTE comparison but using sensorly data)

[Dkoellerwx]

Los Angeles launched almost a year ago and Orange County last October, and their coverage is not shown on the map above.

 

Robert

 

Doesn't appear to show New York City either.

[WiWavelength]

The current January commercial says "Competitor information gathered prior to December 5, 2013" 

 

That standard boilerplate language could mean the data was culled any time prior to December 5, 2013.  As those in the know will tell you, there are many ways to lie with statistics.

 

AJ

[Destroyallcubes]

Since the airing of the commercial I have not seen anything change on the sprint map. Yet they have launched and added LTE. Typical deceiving commercial. And all they have to do is put something in fine print, which you can not read. There is something wrong with false advertising like this.

[anthony.spina97]

Here's what Verizon shows for coverage in their newest commercial for those who haven't seen the January version:

 

 

It pretty clearly shows Sprint in last place for total footprint, which I do not believe to be the case.

Notice how that map has almost no LTE in the Shentel area. That's the big red flag that throw's the whole thing off.

 

-Anthony

[swintec]

Los Angeles launched almost a year ago and Orange County last October, and their coverage is not shown on the map above.

 

Robert

 

I almost missed the 3 spots of west coast coverage it shows until I zoomed in.  Isnt the small blip around the LA / Orange County area?  Is the part just north of it SF?  i assume both reflect an early portion of deployment.

[davidtm]

It's like Sprint is the hot "other sister" to the popular girl who gets all the attention. Usually the popular girl gets knocked up or ends up with herpes. Sprint deserves a little more recognition and hopefully will come out the better network once everything is said and done.

Yeah, the sister without STDs will definitely be the better long-term partner, hopefully like Sprint after NV is completed.

 

Sent from my CM 10.1 Touchpad using Tapatalk

 

 

[thewezgrays]

All of those maps are overstating coverage for each carrier (I think they are the carrier's maps, right?).. The Sprint map is Sprint's official launches -- but even those maps overstate where they DO show coverage.  Of course we know there are many other locations have have LTE unofficially.  Yeah, it looks like the Sprint map is not the most recent.  We all know that T-Mobile is city limits and AT&T is in the midst of their build. Verizon does have near blanket coverage (my Verizon iPhone has only lost LTE a few times ever -- with a lot of travel).  Sprint will have this (in their footprint) when they complete LTE800 though.

[S4GRU]

All of those maps are overstating coverage for each carrier (I think they are the carrier's maps, right?).. The Sprint map is Sprint's official launches -- but even those maps overstate where they DO show coverage.  Of course we know there are many other locations have have LTE unofficially.  Yeah, it looks like the Sprint map is not the most recent.  We all know that T-Mobile is city limits and AT&T is in the midst of their build. Verizon does have near blanket coverage (my Verizon iPhone has only lost LTE a few times ever -- with a lot of travel).  Sprint will have this (in their footprint) when they complete LTE800 though.

 

That's the point.  That's why the OP shows how bad Verizon mis-stated Sprint coverage by showing REAL coverage from Sensorly.  Get it now?

 

Robert

[thewezgrays]

That's the point.  That's why the OP shows how bad Verizon mis-stated Sprint coverage by showing REAL coverage from Sensorly.  Get it now?

 

Robert

 

Yeah, I understand it and "get it now"...  

 

There is so much complexity in coverage.

 

Obviously Verizon is going to portray it in a way that is favorable to them.

 

I do love the sensorly comparison (even if it is simply relying on who does the most mapping, not who actually has coverage).

 

Also I have seen that Verizon commercial a dozen times tonight and hate it.

[CrossedSignals]

The caveat on Verizon's commercial is: "based on indoor and outdoor testing using smartphones of national carriers' 4G LTE from January-June 2013. Based on July 2012 U.S. Census data. Verizon's 4G LTE service is available to more than 305 million people across 500 markets in the U.S."

 

Obviously they chose a very favorable set of circumstances that don't take into account for recent launches and favor the propagation/building penetration of 700MHz.

[irwinshere]

January-June 2013. That is so lame. What has Sprint completed ... 20,000-25,000 or more towers since last June?

 

Jim, Sent from my Photon 4G using Tapatalk 2

 

 

 

[WiWavelength]

From one such VZW map commercial...

 

"I've got the good one.  I got Verizon."

 

 

So, with a roughly thirty year old woman with dyed hair informing us, I have to assume that she is well versed in wireless industry issues -- such as anti competitive practices, LTE bandwidth, Net neutrality, etc.

 

AJ

[SWMich4G]

After spending over an hour making the Verizon image from screenshots of the commercial, I realized they have the carrier maps right on their website!  I do have to give them credit for updating them, as they are not the same as the ones in the commercial.  Sprint's footprint on the website almost looks competitive with T-Mobile's.  However, they're still airing the commercial with the older maps, so that will be what the vast majority of the public sees. 

 

And CrossedSignals: The images I used are from the newest commercial which claims the data is from "prior to December 5, 2013," not the older commercial that WiWavelength embedded which used data from the first half of 2013. 

[CrossedSignals]

I should have mentioned that I transcribed that statement from a vzw commercial that ran on the Esquire network this evening. I did see the the statement "prior to December 5, 2013" referenced in the same commercial. The next frame of the commercial contained the statement I quoted.

 

For reference, it's the commercial where several people are asked and the "correct" answer queues the band to burst through the illustration of the carrier maps. The maps appeared to match the ones in (edit: post 22).

Edited February 2, 2014 by CrossedSignals

[thewezgrays]

After spending over an hour making the Verizon image from screenshots of the commercial, I realized they have the carrier maps right on their website!  I do have to give them credit for updating them, as they are not the same as the ones in the commercial.  Sprint's footprint on the website almost looks competitive with T-Mobile's.  However, they're still airing the commercial with the older maps, so that will be what the vast majority of the public sees. 

 

And CrossedSignals: The images I used are from the newest commercial which claims the data is from "prior to December 5, 2013," not the older commercial that WiWavelength embedded which used data from the first half of 2013. 

 

I thought I saw a commercial today that showed the T-Mobile one much less coverage than the Sprint one -- so maybe there is an updated commercial floating around?

[hescominsoon]

Possibly. Staff is in discussion -- especially in light of Gigaom's article. Regardless, this thread is top notch.

 

AJ

which article?

[hescominsoon]

found it:

http://gigaom.com/2014/01/30/4g-vs-4g-comparing-lte-networks-in-the-us/

[Fraydog]

From one such VZW map commercial...

 

"I've got the good one. I got Verizon."

 

 

So, with a roughly thirty year old woman with dyed hair informing us, I have to assume that she is well versed in wireless industry issues -- such as anti competitive practices, LTE bandwidth, Net neutrality, etc.

 

AJ

I have had, generally, a good amount of success explaining Net Neutrality to friends. I simply tell them that the ISP's want to charge extra for Netflix because of their fear that 3rd parties will disrupt their incredibly old and crusty business model.

[Fraydog]

Also, on the Fritchard article... I think he's simply not aware that Sprint is moving at a faster scale then what is being stated publicly. If he were I think he'd tone down the rhetoric.

 

Now SoftBank is being judged when they haven't had time to implement their network improvement?

[z250kid]

The only issue I have is that deep in the sticks, people on Verizon don't use Sensorly because they don't know how lol. That said, there are plenty of areas where I fall off LTE to either 1X or EV-DO.

probably have a flip phone

[z250kid]

I have had, generally, a good amount of success explaining Net Neutrality to friends. I simply tell them that the ISP's want to charge extra for Netflix because of their fear that 3rd parties will disrupt their incredibly old and crusty business model.

What looks like a duck on the maps?    

[z250kid]

July 15 2013 stats.  But i bet you Verizon data is current.   Got love marketing.   

[centermedic]

In those comparison commercials they use each carriers coverage maps as of whatever date they put in the fine print.  I think that is how they get away with it.  They retrieve the OFFICIALLY released and available coverage map from each carrier on Jan. 15th for example and then slap on the screen, coverage claims based on data as of Jan 15th.

 

 

Exactly. Verizon is using an old map but the print in the ad states10/13 I believe. Even so, this was a great post. Thanks for putting the work in.

[travismheim]

Excellent thread, thanks for putting in the work to make this. It's pretty cool to see actual maps compared like this.

[jamisonshaw125]

Is it possible to generate a theoretical coverage map with 800 MHz fully deployed? It'd be really cool to see how much sprint is going to cover thanks to 800.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk